[DCRM-L] Standard citation forms corporate main entry

[Barrett, Marcia]

The current proposal calls for using an abbreviated form of the main entry (main corporate body or surname with initials) and the title proper (minus initial articles, part titles, alternative titles).  At midwinter, the consensus of BSC and the working group was that it will be okay to drop subordinate corporate bodies.

Marcia

Marcia Barrett
Special Collections Cataloger
University Libraries
The University of Alabama
Box 870266
Tuscaloosa AL  35487-0266
205-348-6390



From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Robert Maxwell
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 2:34 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Standard citation forms corporate main entry

Don't jump to conclusions, please, Richard :). The proposal for standard citation forms doesn't have anything to do with RDA implementation. RDA cites corporate bodies at the beginning of authorized access point strings in pretty much the same places as AACR2 does. In fact, due to the elimination of the so-called "rule of three" there will be more citations in RDA beginning with a personal/family/corporate name than there were in AACR2, and less citations under title alone.

Bob

Robert L. Maxwell
Special Collections and Ancient Languages Catalog Librarian
Genre/Form Authorities Librarian
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568

"We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842.

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Noble, Richard
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 12:22 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Standard citation forms corporate main entry

The title will in many cases be entirely insufficient. If RDA has so disconnected the library "community" from the general run of people who cite things, then perhaps we should disconnect "standard citation forms" from RDA, and formulate according to scholarly expectation and, to some extent, the practices of antiquarian booksellers.

The 510 is a note field. There's no more reason, and perhaps less, to follow RDA than there is to let e.g. the Chicago Manual be our guide.

RICHARD NOBLE : RARE BOOKS CATALOGER : JOHN HAY LIBRARY : BROWN UNIVERSITY
PROVIDENCE, RI 02912 : 401-863-1187/FAX 863-3384 : RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU<mailto:RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU>
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Deborah J. Leslie <DJLeslie at folger.edu<mailto:DJLeslie at folger.edu>> wrote:
What is the current state of debate for corporate main entries in formulating 510 forms? Has it been decided to drop the corporate main entry from the citation form? From the BSC annual 2011 minutes:

... the working group could drop the main entry for multiple authors and corporate authors and use the title only, since the title will not change between RDA and AACR2. There was general support for this idea, though there will be cases where the main entries are necessary to sufficiently distinguish the resource.


Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. | Head of Cataloging, Folger Shakespeare Library | 201 East Capitol St., S.E. | Washington, D.C. 20003
djleslie at folger.edu<mailto:djleslie at folger.edu> | 202.675-0369<tel:202.675-0369> | http://www.folger.edu<http://www.folger.edu/>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20120126/959c8dd8/attachment.htm